All levels of training- teachers, administrators, IT, service providers, parents, IEP teams, etc
Feeling like AT is "just one more thing" as opposed to it being embedded within existing processes
Lack of top Level Support & Understanding
Difficulties in making change without support
Jump right to tools
Perhaps clear processes are not in place
Consideration Process in the IEP
Just a checkbox
No actual discussion
A general lack of understanding of what to do in this section and why by multiple team members
Questions / Possible Solutions to Consider for the above concerns:
More "PR"- step outside of our "Education Brain" and promote what is needed in an easily understandable way (a way that is "integrated" instead of that "one more thing that needs to be done...."
Start small, get one person "on board", help them to be successful, and others may jump "on board"
Work with some one who has the "power" to update the consideration in the IEP so it's not just a checkbox, but perhaps a series of "guiding questions" that may help lead/prompt discussion in these areas better than a checkbox
When attempting to make change, make sure there is a representative from all stakeholder groups at the table
Change should be a "top down" - "bottom up" process
Universal Design of technology (where does AT fit in?)
Home Smart Speakers (Amazon Echo, Google Chrome)
Underwhelmed with the tech - recognition - frustrating but others in the group said it was very accurate
APH staff is successful
System is adaptable and modular - fitting needs of individuals
Customization of system
Changing the stimulation in the environment
Input from AAC successful
Google home is here at conference Amazon has a strong presence at CSUN
AT Implementation
On a positive note, the fact that we are discussing AT implementation issues does mean that young people are being assessed and provided with assistive technology solutions for use in the classroom. However, some issues still remain which affect the use of AT and AAC in education settings, thus leading some to consider that the time, effort and financial resources have been wasted. One particular area of concern is the affect of transition and the increased likelihood that equipment would be abandoned at this point, either because of challenges handover or local policies that result in equipment being kept by an institution. It was also considered that some AT gets abandoned or is otherwise underused following assessment without transition.
The overriding solution to this problem was through the use of carefully considered communication and involvement of multiple parties. Communication can be facilitated through the shared development of the IEP goals and through documentation, including video evidence, that could be stored online through a digital portfolio such as Seesaw. An interesting comparison was made within the discussion group that slow progress, low incidence, students may be more likely to abandon equipment compared to those whose equipment makes an immediate visible difference to curriculum access. An example could be to compare a young switch user developing small gain skills to a screenreader user who's equipment, with training, gives immediate access to recording and resources. It was suggested that the use of ALP could illuminate the stages that such a user might go through, thus making it easier to communicate to staff and parents the purpose of simple switch activities and the direction of travel. Training staff on technical devices was another area of concern, particularly in situations with high levels of staff turnover, and it was agreed that capitalising on manufacturer and supplier reps for support will make the work easier for all involved.
Welcome Assistive technology Town Hall Meeting!
ATIA 2018Topics selected:
AT Consideration in Education
Universal Design of technology (where does AT fit in?)
Home Smart Speakers (Amazon Echo, Google Chrome)
AT Implementation
On a positive note, the fact that we are discussing AT implementation issues does mean that young people are being assessed and provided with assistive technology solutions for use in the classroom. However, some issues still remain which affect the use of AT and AAC in education settings, thus leading some to consider that the time, effort and financial resources have been wasted. One particular area of concern is the affect of transition and the increased likelihood that equipment would be abandoned at this point, either because of challenges handover or local policies that result in equipment being kept by an institution. It was also considered that some AT gets abandoned or is otherwise underused following assessment without transition.
The overriding solution to this problem was through the use of carefully considered communication and involvement of multiple parties. Communication can be facilitated through the shared development of the IEP goals and through documentation, including video evidence, that could be stored online through a digital portfolio such as Seesaw. An interesting comparison was made within the discussion group that slow progress, low incidence, students may be more likely to abandon equipment compared to those whose equipment makes an immediate visible difference to curriculum access. An example could be to compare a young switch user developing small gain skills to a screenreader user who's equipment, with training, gives immediate access to recording and resources. It was suggested that the use of ALP could illuminate the stages that such a user might go through, thus making it easier to communicate to staff and parents the purpose of simple switch activities and the direction of travel. Training staff on technical devices was another area of concern, particularly in situations with high levels of staff turnover, and it was agreed that capitalising on manufacturer and supplier reps for support will make the work easier for all involved.
Facilitators